MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022805191

The Social and Demographic Contours of Contemporary Grandparenthood: Mapping Patterns in Canada and the United States

2001· article· en· W3022805191 on OpenAlexaffabout
Candace L. Kemp

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial and Economic Dimensions of an Aging Population Research Papers · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrandparentCohabitationProfiling (computer programming)Context (archaeology)SociologyDemographyGeographyPsychologyDevelopmental psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although there exists a growing body of literature dedicated to understanding the complexities of grandparenting, few researchers have documented the demographic patterns and social trends that encompass contemporary grandparenthood. Concomitantly, in instances where researchers have described such patterns, data are largely derived from studies profiling American populations. This paper, therefore, examines social trends in grandparenthood and outlines the demographic context within which Canadians participate in grandparent-grandchild relationships. Drawing on nationally representative samples and data derived from both the 1990 and 1995 General Social Surveys of Canada, this study analyzes patterns influencing grandparenthood such as grandparents' rates of survival, the prevalence of grandparenthood, multiple generation families, step-grandparenthood and the availability of grandchildren. In addition, analysis considers rates of intergenerational cohabitation and surrogate parenting as well as grandparents' participation in additional social roles.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial and Economic Dimensions of an Aging Population Research PapersSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207